Skip to main content

What could be so important about my father’s U-boat?


Bear Island
(1979)

It shouldn’t really be that easy to stumble across hitherto unencountered Alistair MacLean movies. There have been fewer than 15 big screen adaptations of his work over the years; the failure of Bear Island all but killed any continued interest in an author who had been highly prolific during the ’60s and ‘70s. MacLean aficionados will opine that his novels tend to be unsympathetically re-envisioned, bearing (ahem) little resemblance to his original masterpieces, but it’s difficult to buy into any notion that works of art are being desecrated.


MacLean churned out standard format boy’s own adventure yarns, usually involving spies or WWII escapades, and the resulting movies are invariably undistinguished fodder for weekend TV matinees; hence their forgettableness (and conversely, their discoverability). Everyone is familiar with (less than) a handful of adaptations (The Guns of Navarone, Where Eagles Dare, Ice Station Zebra), but his heyday in the movies had passed by the early ‘70s. Unsurprisingly, Bear Island has few credentials plot-wise to make its case as an undiscovered gem. Nor has it assembled an amazing cast (an idiosyncratically chosen one, certainly). But it does have something very vital going for it. One might argue it represents merely a superficial factor if the script isn’t there. But, in an era of CGI breath and fake snow, the movie’s accomplishment is all the more arresting; authenticity of location.


Bear Island features no bears, which should be made clear from the outset. The setting is the Norwegian island of the same name, although director Don Sharp and his cast and crew shot in British Columbia. Indeed, the film’s one claim to fame (since no one saw it) was the adverse publicity surrounding its $9m (US) cost; up to that point Canada’s most expensive film. It’s difficult to see why the producers thought such an investment would pay off, other than through a failure to recognise the shifting sands of audience interests following the arrival of Lucas, Spielberg et al. Unlike other big budget bombs of the period, it’s easy to see why the picture cost as much as it did; logistically, a shoot in such conditions would not be cheap. And, in terms of vistas, the results are all up there on screen.


Particularly during the early stages, the atmosphere created by this vast, desolate, snowy expanse is palpable. Haunting and evocative, it put me increasingly in mind of another film that opted to genuinely facing the elements, also in British Columbia; John Carpenter’s The Thing. I’d be surprised if Carpenter had not seen Bear Island; he would surely have been aware of it. Once that connection has been made, it’s easy to draw further parallels between the two; all Bear Island really needed was a beserk alien creature to engage the viewer, although a beserk creature in pursuit of Nazi gold might have been a difficult motivation to justify. Nevertheless, both pictures feature a group of difficult to individualise scientists inhabiting a remote outpost in sub-zero conditions; some of whom are not who they claim to be, their numbers are gradually whittled down, they are cut off from rescue, they are increasingly subject to sabotage and the intrusion of the elements. Certainly, during the mid-section, when a team member goes out to check on the generator (which then explodes), I could have momentarily forgotten which film I was watching.


Unfortunately, there is little else too make this compelling. Sharp, who worked in a variety of British TV (The Avengers) and film (the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu series, the not-bad-at-all Robert Powell The 39 Steps the year before this) stages the action competently, and cinematographer Alan Hume mostly ensures the joins between the exteriors and the Pinewood sets are not too obvious. But the premise and scenario are murky from the off. Introductions inform us this is a collection of UN-sanctioned scientists sent to study climate change in the area (changed from the novel, which featured a movie making crew). It sounds quite topical, but we never see them studying anything. I’m not even clear why the members of the party intent on plundering the gold required such a cover. Wouldn’t they have free rein to do pretty what they wanted on this barren wasteland (the nearby UN base seems oblivious to what’s going on)?


As soon as they arrive, Donald Sutherland’s beardy American Lansing (Sutherland’s Canadian status may explain his unlikely action lead duties; he reportedly took the part because he’d taken up sailing as a pastime) wants to check out the derelict U-boat base; his daddy was a U-boat commander, you see. Lansing effortlessly figures out what is going on, so the only intrigue left available is who is doing what and why. Sharp and his co-writers are so clumsy tossing frozen red herrings about it is quickly evident that anyone who comes under suspicion can’t be the true culprit (no double double-bluffs here). But there’s a greater problem in not really caring who is doing what and why. There are several parties after the precious metal, but there seem to be a greater number of faceless bystanders who never get a look in.


Reinforcing the pulpiness of the material, several of the cast have that “I’ll appear in anything as long as it’s crap” credentials. Richard Widmark is a Norwegian (he’d just come off The Swarm, so was clearly on a roll). Lloyd Bridges, is not yet consciously going for self-parody, but that’s the only difference between what he does here and the following year’s Airplane! Sharp regular Christopher Lee is a Pole, but he’s sadly under-used. Then there’s Vanessa Redgrave, also sporting a interesting accent, as the kind-of love interest. It’s rather refreshing to find Redgrave and Sutherland in such traditionally macho fare, but unfortunately their presence signifies little. Sutherland perhaps isn’t at his best, as he requires more than a one-note hero to bring out his eccentricities. Still, at least he gets stuck into an unlikely bout of fisticuffs. He would return to an unwelcoming island in Eye of the Needle, another Nazi-related picture, two years later. A very young Bruce Greenwood plays a technician, in his movie debut.


The plot wasn’t going to stand up to scrutiny under the best of circumstances, but the lack of distractions highlights a number of gaping holes; no one would seriously go along with Widmark dismissing calls for outside help, not when team members are dropping like flies. And wither the strange decision by Sutherland and Redgrave to make off on piddly little snow scooters, leaving the bad guys to take advantage of the much more impressive hydro-copters?


Occasional moments suggest something much more interesting could be done with this setting; there’s a highly impressive U-boat pen set that is barely used. The sight of a handcuffed skeleton in a German uniform suggests the discovery of long buried secrets; it’s rather typical of MacLean that said secrets turn out to be boring old ingots. If the makers had veered off into something offbeat and uncanny, Bear Island might at least retain cult appeal. But its plotting is too unexceptional to lend it status beyond that of a handsomely mounted, ploddingly predictable adventure yarn.

*** 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Your honor, with all due respect: if you're going to try my case for me, I wish you wouldn't lose it.

The Verdict (1982)
(SPOILERS) Sidney Lumet’s return to the legal arena, with results every bit as compelling as 12 Angry Men a quarter of a century earlier. This time the focus is on the lawyer, in the form of Paul Newman’s washed-up ambulance chaser Frank Galvin, given a case that finally matters to him. In less capable hands, The Verdict could easily have resorted to a punch-the-air piece of Hollywood cheese, but, thanks to Lumet’s earthy instincts and a sharp, unsentimental screenplay from David Mamet, this redemption tale is one of the genre’s very best.

And it could easily have been otherwise. The Verdict went through several line-ups of writer, director and lead, before reverting to Mamet’s original screenplay. There was Arthur Hiller, who didn’t like the script. Robert Redford, who didn’t like the subsequent Jay Presson Allen script and brought in James Bridges (Redford didn’t like that either). Finally, the producers got the hump with the luxuriantly golden-haired star for meetin…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

Who are you and why do you know so much about car washes?

Ant-Man and the Wasp (2018)
(SPOILERS) The belated arrival of the Ant-Man sequel on UK shores may have been legitimately down to World Cup programming, but it nevertheless adds to the sense that this is the inessential little sibling of the MCU, not really expected to challenge the grosses of a Doctor Strange, let alone the gargantuan takes of its two predecessors this year. Empire magazine ran with this diminution, expressing disappointment that it was "comparatively minor and light-hitting" and "lacks the scale and ambition of recent Marvel entries". Far from deficits, for my money these should be regard as accolades bestowed upon Ant-Man and the Wasp; it understands exactly the zone its operating in, yielding greater dividends than the three most recent prior Marvel entries the review cites in its efforts at point scoring.

Dude, you're embarrassing me in front of the wizards.

Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
(SPOILERS) The cliffhanger sequel, as a phenomenon, is a relatively recent thing. Sure, we kind of saw it with The Empire Strikes Back – one of those "old" movies Peter Parker is so fond of – a consequence of George Lucas deliberately borrowing from the Republic serials of old, but he had no guarantee of being able to complete his trilogy; it was really Back to the Future that began the trend, and promptly drew a line under it for another decade. In more recent years, really starting with The MatrixThe Lord of the Rings stands apart as, post-Weinstein's involvement, fashioned that way from the ground up – shooting the second and third instalments back-to-back has become a thing, both more cost effective and ensuring audiences don’t have to endure an interminable wait for their anticipation to be sated. The flipside of not taking this path is an Allegiant, where greed gets the better of a studio (split a novel into two movie parts assuming a…

The simple fact is, your killer is in your midst. Your killer is one of you.

The Avengers 5.12: The Superlative Seven
I’ve always rather liked this one, basic as it is in premise. If the title consciously evokes The Magnificent Seven, to flippant effect, the content is Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None, but played out with titans of their respective crafts – including John Steed, naturally – encountering diminishing returns. It also boasts a cast of soon-to-be-famous types (Charlotte Rampling, Brian Blessed, Donald Sutherland), and the return of one John Hollis (2.16: Warlock, 4.7: The Cybernauts). Kanwitch ROCKS!

I freely chose my response to this absurd world. If given the opportunity, I would have been more vigorous.

The Falcon and the Snowman (1985)
(SPOILERS) I suspect, if I hadn’t been ignorant of the story of Christopher Boyce and Andrew Daulton Lee selling secrets to the Soviets during the ‘70s, I’d have found The Falcon and the Snowman less engaging than I did. Which is to say that John Schlesinger’s film has all the right ingredients to be riveting, including a particularly camera-hogging performance from Sean Penn (as Lee), but it’s curiously lacking in narrative drive. Only fitfully does it channel the motives of its protagonists and their ensuing paranoia. As such, the movie makes a decent primer on the case, but I ended up wondering if it might not be ideal fodder for retelling as a miniseries.

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
(SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison.

Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War, Infinity Wars I & II, Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok. It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions (Iron Man II), but there are points in Age of Ultron where it becomes distractingly so. …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

Gloat all you like, but just remember, I’m the star of this picture.

The Avengers 5.11: Epic
Epic has something of a Marmite reputation, and even as someone who rather likes it, I can quite see its flaws. A budget-conscious Brian Clemens was inspired to utilise readily-available Elstree sets, props and costumes, the results both pushing the show’s ever burgeoning self-reflexive agenda and providing a much more effective (and amusing) "Avengers girl ensnared by villains attempting to do for her" plot than The House That Jack BuiltDon't Look Behind You and the subsequent The Joker. Where it falters is in being little more than a succession of skits and outfit changes for Peter Wyngarde. While that's very nearly enough, it needs that something extra to reach true greatness. Or epic-ness.